Hi Robert (and Tom),
Il 04/04/11 16:57, Robert Haas ha scritto:
> Forgive me for asking what may seem like a stupid question, but what's
> not XML compliant about them now, and why do we care? The text is
> only ever going to parse as SGML (not XML) so I guess I don't see why
> it matters. I don't really object to the proposed patch but I guess
> I'm not sure what it accomplishes.
My apologies, I should have explained it better and at once.
Here is the context. I am coordinating the Italian translation of the
documentation and we are about to create a branch for 9.1. The
publishing mechanism is based on DocBook XML (as well as the French
one), as we are facing extreme difficulties publishing using SGML tools.
My intention was to start and change some simple documentation files in
order to make our conversion process from SGML to XML smoother, while
keeping the SGML compatibility of the original documentation intact.
Also I was trying to make the ENTITY declarations consistent throughout
I hope I gave you a more clear explanation.
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it | www.2ndQuadrant.it
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-04-04 16:37:24|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Uppercase SGML entity declarations |
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2011-04-04 16:11:11|
|Subject: Re: psql's \h MOVE|
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jan-Erik Lärka||Date: 2011-04-04 16:34:21|
|Subject: Non Win/*nix UTF-8 codepage not known to PostgreSQL developers?!|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-04-04 16:13:12|
|Subject: Re: time table for beta1|